Conference Session

Faculty Development Work-in-Progress Poster Session

Collection

2018 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Heidi M. Sherick, University of Michigan

Tagged Topics

Faculty Development Constituency Committee

Paper ID #23704Work in Progress: Coaching as a Midcareer Faculty Development ApproachDr. Heidi M. Sherick, University of Michigan Dr. Heidi Sherick has worked in higher education for over 25 years. Currently, Heidi is the Faculty Devel- opment and Leadership Specialist in the College of Engineering and the Medical School at the University of Michigan. Her primary role is to design and initiate a suite of professional leadership development ac- tivities and coaching, mentoring, and sponsoring strategies for faculty. She provides one-on-one coaching for faculty in new executive leadership roles and for Associate level

Conference Session

Research in Faculty Development

Collection

2018 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Benjamin David Lutz, Oregon State University; Allyson Jo Barlow, Oregon State University; Shane A. Brown P.E., Oregon State University; Dominga Sanchez, Oregon State University

Tagged Topics

Faculty Development Constituency Committee

Paper ID #21477Exploring Faculty Beliefs About Teaching Evaluations: What is Missing fromCurrent Measures?Dr. Benjamin David Lutz, Oregon State University Ben Lutz is a Postdoctoral Scholar in Engineering Education at Oregon State University. His research in- terests include innovative pedagogies in engineering design, conceptual change and development, school- to-work transitions for new engineers, and efforts for inclusion and diversity within engineering. His current work explores how students describe their own learning in engineering design and how that learn- ing supports transfer of learning from school into

Conference Session

Faculty Development Medley

Collection

2018 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Christine S. Grant, North Carolina State University; Barbara E. Smith, North Carolina State University; Louis A. Martin-Vega, North Carolina State University; Matthew T. Stimpson, North Carolina State University

Tagged Topics

Faculty Development Constituency Committee

in terms of the themes and overarching goals. Faculty have varying levelsof input into and interaction with the execution of the strategic plan with the majority of theirfocus concentrating on the day-to-day operations of their research and academic programs.Faculty well-being surveys can reflect the status of the faculty views on their collectiveexperiences in an institution; some issues raised in these surveys can be addressed in targetedcollege of engineering faculty development initiatives.The purpose of this paper is to describe the process of how an established college of engineeringfaculty development office at North Carolina State University integrated the findings of aqualitative faculty well-being survey and programmatic faculty

Conference Session

Faculty Development Lessons Learned Poster Session

Collection

2018 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Ken Yasuhara, University of Washington; Jim L. Borgford-Parnell, University of Washington

Tagged Topics

Faculty Development Constituency Committee

attitudes toward the course or the instructor.For the substantial number of returning clients who have us do SGIDs in subsequent offerings ofthe same course, the database enables us to provide longitudinal reporting that tracks shiftingtrends in feedback across multiple terms. Our longitudinal reports help our clients identifywhether and how changes they made, that were based on student feedback, may be impactingstudents in subsequent course offerings. The longitudinal reports also help faculty membersidentify issues they may have initially dismissed as trivial or minor when seen in a single report,but often change that impression when seen in a longitudinal report as a persistent issue.Although categorizing and grouping feedback takes some time

Conference Session

Evidence-based Practices in Faculty Development

Collection

2018 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Vittorio Marone, University of Texas, San Antonio; Robin L. Nelson, University of Texas, San Antonio; Stephanie Ann Garcia, University of Texas at San Antonio; Emily Peterek Bonner, University of Texas, San Antonio; Timothy Yuen, University of Texas, San Antonio; Joann Browning P.E., University of Texas, San Antonio

Tagged Topics

Faculty Development Constituency Committee

, simulations, or discussions).This expectation brings attention to the need for the development of pedagogical competencesamong both engineering instructors and students in order to implement new learning andteaching strategies and provide relevant educational experiences to all learners [18].Recommended learner-centered strategies in engineering education include problem-basedlearning, hands-on activities, peer instruction, collaboration between teachers, and a multilayeredapproach to assessment [18]. With most engineering doctoral programs focusing on preparingthe next generation of researchers, there are few instances where future professors and instructorsare being adequately trained in engineering pedagogy. Further, engineering faculty may not

Conference Session

Evidence-based Practices in Faculty Development

Collection

2018 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Sarah E. Zappe, Pennsylvania State University, University Park; Megan Huffstickler, Pennsylvania State University, University Park; Joseph C. Tise, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park; Thomas A. Litzinger, Pennsylvania State University, University Park; Sven G. Bilén, Pennsylvania State University, University Park

Tagged Topics

Faculty Development Constituency Committee

teaching the course for 20 years and they’re really set in their ways. And then, you have new people coming in who are more open to changing things, and I think the main issue is you have so many people. And trying to get a person to buy into it and utilize it, I think is the biggest challenge.The logistical considerations related to having instructors and sections at other campuses alsocomplicated the adoption process. As one individual stated, “As you can imagine, getting 17faculty here at (name of largest campus) and another more than a dozen faculty at the campuses toagree on. Everything in the course is challenge.”Relatedly, some participants discussed prior attempts to standardize the course curriculum,describing barriers

Conference Session

Faculty Development Work-in-Progress Poster Session

Collection

2018 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Jim L. Borgford-Parnell, University of Washington; Ken Yasuhara, University of Washington; Kamal Abdulla Ahmed, University of Washington; David Schipf, University of Washington

Tagged Topics

Faculty Development Constituency Committee

with a student workshop modeland ongoing analysis of data collected in the workshops. At the University of Washington’sOffice for the Advancement of Engineering Teaching & Learning, our primary activity isinstructional consultation with faculty, but we also frequently guest-present a workshop forengineering students entitled “Teamwork for learning and project success.”The workshop’s immediate, practical objective is to help students begin group work on the rightfooting. The fundamental emphasis, however, is on seeing group projects (at least in school)primarily as a context and vehicle for learning. Our experience suggests that both students andfaculty tend to see efficient project completion, quality of work, and realistic preparation

Conference Session

Faculty Development Medley

Collection

2018 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Sylvia L. Mendez, University of Colorado, Colorado Springs; Valerie Martin Conley, University of Colorado, Colorado Springs; Comas Lamar Haynes, Georgia Tech Research Institute; Rosario A. Gerhardt, Georgia Institute of Technology; Jennifer Tygret, University of Colorado, Colorado Springs

Tagged Topics

Diversity, Faculty Development Constituency Committee

URM engineering faculty, while enhancing the career engagement of emeritifaculty who served as mentors to the URM faculty. The primary goal was to match emeritifaculty with URM faculty in order to support the mentees as they navigated university promotionand tenure processes and established a wider professional presence in their competitive fields viaa new mentoring and advocacy-networking paradigm. The paradigm was developed through anIMPACT MENTORING PROGRAM 4extensive review of the literature across disciplines, with a targeted focus on diverse mentoringrelationships in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) fields (Johnson,2015; Kram, 1985

Conference Session

Revealing the Invisible: Engineering Course Activities that Address Privilege, -Isms, and Power Relations (Interactive Session)

Collection

2018 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Joel Alejandro Mejia, University of San Diego; Diana A. Chen, University of San Diego; Odesma Onika Dalrymple, University of San Diego; Susan M Lord, University of San Diego

Tagged Topics

ASEE Diversity Committee, Diversity, Faculty Development Constituency Committee

Tagged Divisions

Design in Engineering Education, International, Liberal Education/Engineering & Society, Minorities in Engineering

inclusion: Women and minorities in engineering, Handbook of Engineering Education Research ed. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press, Ch. 17, 2014.[2] A. L. Pawley, "Universalized narratives: Patterns in how faculty members define “engineering”," Journal of Engineering Education, vol. 98, pp. 309-319, 2009.[3] D. Riley, "Employing liberative pedagogies in engineering education," Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering, vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 137-158, 2003.[4] D. Riley, "Engineering and social justice," Synthesis Lectures on Engineers, Technology, and Society, vol. 3, pp. 1-152, 2008.[5] ABET. (2017, February 04). Criteria for accrediting engineering programs 2016-2017. Available